The OpenStreetMap Foundation has confirmed that the new iPhoto for iOS app is using OpenStreetMap location data for its photos, and not Google Maps, as Apple has used in many other applications before. Apple has not yet confirmed the break from Google Maps, but appears to finally be transitioning away from the service.

512pixels.net discovered Wednesday night that the iPhoto for iOS location data seemed not to be pulled from Google Maps, as it is for iPhoto for Mac OS X; the OSM Foundation posted Thursday morning that it was "pleased to find" Apple is using its data. The author of OSM's blog post notes that the data Apple is using is nearly two years old, from April 2010, and appears to only be used for locations outside the US. You can see the tiles Apple is using from OpenStreetMap here. OpenStreetMap notes the app is "missing the necessary credit to OpenStreetMap’s contributors; we look forward to working with Apple to get that on there."

Daring Fireball claimed Wednesday night that iPhoto's location-feature maps are still created from Google Maps tiles. But The Verge reports that photos with attached maps in the new slideshow and journal sharing features, at least, have Apple-provided tiles pulled from a server at gsp2.apple.com.

The Apple-sourced tiles may be the culmination of all of Apple's mapping company acquisitions (C3, PlaceBase, and Poly9) in years past. Likewise, the new map sources suggest the company is further distancing itself from Google, with which it has developed a tenuous relationship over intellectual property issues.

Apple has not responded to requests for comment on the matter.

Casey Johnston
Casey Johnston is the former Culture Editor at Ars Technica, and now does the occasional freelance story. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in Applied Physics. Twitter@caseyjohnston

Just checked, Apple’s map definitely includes highly detailed roads I put into OSM which don’t appear in any other online map. Tee hee. Credit where credit is due, Apple. If the shoe were on the other foot you’d be suing somebody.

If the OSM data is used outside the USA, why does the comparison shot use Washington DC? (presumably Washington is from one of the Apple mapping acquisitions). Seems a poor choice to illustrate the headline.

I really don't know how someone can say definitively one way or another from a few samples if a map is from one person or another. Maps inherently have the same basic data and it's possible of the many people that have made maps that some of the maps are close to identical.

OSM should be glad that Apple did not sue them for violating a patent that resembles "a method to convert machine data into a visual representation that can be interpreted as geographical information by human".

My bet is that this was a last minute change that they hacked together. The outdated data, the awful stylesheet, the lack of attribution...This is not what Apple does when they put a lot of thought and time into a decision...

OSM doesn't provide anything like the searching capabilities of Google Maps. It is a good choice for iPhoto, but Apple will have to find a new search partner if they want to retain the most useful feature of Siri.

Is that labeled right? my google maps on iPhone look like the photo on the right not left

I was thinking the same thing, but if you read the link zabuni posted, it is pretty clear. The Apple maps have "roads" that are walking trails and parking lot lines in OSM. So not only did they use OSM, they used it incorrectly.

I hate OSM. Foursquare switched to it from Google recently and it's rendered the ability of Superusers to fix and move venues almost impossible. When we zoom in, the street names don't re-render, they stay where they were in the zoomed out view. Outside the US, road data is spotty in some countries and venue data is either non-existent or is goofy like KineticK1's example.

I like the idea of an open source map, but it sure isn't ready for prime time yet.

I think google should just pull out now and make google maps break on all iDevices.

This is just vile.

It's vile that Apple is looking to other sources for map data? How so?

It's vile to the users. With the exception of the rare few, most user agree that this is a step backwards. If Apple wants to create a mapping product that is better than Google's, then they should do so. To hack together something that makes millions of eyes want to vomit, then replace the perfectly good mapping system with this awful excuse for a visual display is just cruel and unusual punishment to users.

This may be the beginning of the end to Apple's quality control. It's as if they fired their quality control and, in its place, put the "Google Vendetta" department in charge. Just vile to the eyes.

I think google should just pull out now and make google maps break on all iDevices.

This is just vile.

It's vile that Apple is looking to other sources for map data? How so?

It's vile to the users. With the exception of the rare few, most user agree that this is a step backwards. If Apple wants to create a mapping product that is better than Google's, then they should do so. To hack together something that makes millions of eyes want to vomit, then replace the perfectly good mapping system with this awful excuse for a visual display is just cruel and unusual punishment to users.

This may be the beginning of the end to Apple's quality control. It's as if they fired their quality control and, in its place, put the "Google Vendetta" department in charge. Just vile to the eyes.

I don't disagree that the new map is different (and I have no opinion is to which is better), but Gigaflop suggested that Google should, in response, break Google Maps for all iOS users. Wouldn't that be an even more "vile" an action than Apple simply providing an ugly map in a single application on iOS?

For all those who don't like OSM:Yes, OSM may be not yet the most advanced map. But it is open, and people can contribute to it.This means that in the long run it will be better than anything else. If you don't like its current state to the extent you want to do something about it, you can. And this makes a difference.In my area there are two easter eggs in the map data used by nearly everyone, including google. One of them is really annoying: shows a same-level crossing where you cannot actually turn to the road which goes to my village. My guests routinely can't find their way to me, we have trucks every day in the village who don't even wanted to go here, etc. And it won't ever be fixed, as this is something the map data owner deliberately included in the map so they can use it to sue if someone uses their data.No wonder I am a happy OSM user, encouraging everyone to forget commercial map providers.

A big reason why you are starting to see many web companies move away from Google is because they have pulled an bait and switch. Using the Google Maps API (which is the only legal way to use their rendered map tiles) use to cost nothing. Google has changed their tune and are charging for the use of it's API. If you have a reasonable large user base your costs are through the roof. Geocaching.com which just moved to OSM said they get about 2 Million map views a month. List price for that level of use with the Google API is about $150,000 / year. That's a lot of money for something that cost you nothing last year. Needless to say I'm sure FourSquare's usage cost was a lot more than that (as CrackedLCD pointed out also just moved to OSM). The free ride is over.

Of course Apple has no such excuse. If there is one tech company that could afford the Google licence cost it's Apple. Obvisouly this is just one small step in moving away from Google. What I find most interesting is that Apple thinks they can do a better job than anyone else. Apple isn't a mapping company. At least FourSquare knew better than to try and roll their own mapping tiles and instead went with MapBox who builds the tilesets from OSM data (http://mapbox.com/blog/foursquare-switc ... streetmap/). I actually really like what MapBox did with the OSM data, but the results are only as good as the input. OSM quality varies greatly around the globe. Usually it's pretty good in high population areas, but the quality falls off rapidly as you move out. There are places OSM is much better than Google (i.e. - Sarajevo - http://lxbarth.github.com/compare/#43.8 ... 3676758,12), but that is the exception not the rule. In the end until more people (and more importantly government agencies) start giving their time and or data to OSM it simply won't be as complete.

In my area there are two easter eggs in the map data used by nearly everyone, including google. One of them is really annoying: shows a same-level crossing where you cannot actually turn to the road which goes to my village. My guests routinely can't find their way to me…

Is “Easter egg” the accepted term of art for these things?

I moved to Morgantown, WV many years ago, and the Rand McNally map showed a town called “Gumshoe” very near by. I was badly disappointed that I couldn't go to the PO there and get a PO Box in Gumshoe, WV. Your issue looks a bit more significant.

I don't actually find the OSM maps that bad, although they could use a bit more polish. I think it's more important for the data to be accurate though, and so it's important to note though that Apple is still using Google Maps in the US (and maybe in Canada?) and using OSM for the rest of the world. A very good reason could be that outside of the US the commercial map providers, including Google, have or have had spotty coverage. So perhaps the OSM worldwide coverage (excluding the States) is better?

(Also, many comment threads have crazy Android fanatics yelling about how 'closed' Apple is, shouldn't you be in this comment thread praising them for using an open mapping source? I notice a strange silence about how great it is that they are embracing an open standard.)